Archived: Ashley House

One inspector carried out this inspection.

We found the accommodation was all on one level. The building was spacious with wide corridors. And this meant people who used wheelchairs were able to move around easily. There were four kitchens that people were able to access.

We found that the service was clean and well maintained. We considered our inspection findings to answer the questions we always ask; Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service well-led?

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with five people who used the service, three staff who were supporting them and from looking at records.

If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary, please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

We saw that people's needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare. Care records contained information on people's needs and information for staff on how to meet them. We saw that potential risks to people were appropriately assessed and planned for.

We found staff were knowledgeable about people's needs and were respectful of people's dignity and the need to balance safety and independence. One person told us, 'They don't see me as disabled. I go for whatever I want to do but they make sure I'm safe, so if any of my ideas weren't good they would advise me'.

We found that the provider had appropriate arrangements in place for the ordering, recording, handling, storage, administration and disposal of medicines. Some people were supported to self-medicate. This meant people were protected against the risks associated with medicines.

CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care homes. The manager demonstrated knowledge of their responsibilities in relation to DoLS. We , through the use of safety belts in wheelchairs. We noted that the DoLS assessments concluded that in these instances people were not subject to a loss of liberty.

Is the service effective?

People told us that they were happy with the care that had been delivered. One person told us, 'I get the support I need'. It was clear from our observations and from speaking to staff, that they had a good understanding of people's care and support needs and that they knew them well. People's care and health needs were assessed with them. People told us, 'They go through my care plan regularly'.

People told us, they were happy with the care and support provided and one person told us, 'I absolutely love living here'.

Is the service caring?

People were treated with respect and dignity by staff.

People were supported by kind and caring staff. We saw that people were treated with respect and dignity and that staff were warm and friendly. One person told us how the service had supported them. They told us, 'They couldn't have done more. They go way above my expectations. They strive to help me in any way possible'. Another person told us, 'The staff are great, really friendly, we have a great rapport and a bit of banter'.

Staff we spoke with demonstrated a good knowledge of the needs and concern for the well-being of people they supported.

Is the service responsive?

We found that the service had implemented an action plan, following a quality assurance inspection by the provider.

We saw that regular residents' meetings took place and that people had been involved in the planning process for the new accommodation.

People we spoke with told us the service allowed staff to change their hours in order for them to be supported with particular activities. People told us that on occasion they were supported by agency staff but that if they were unhappy with them the provider asked them not to come again. One person told us they were asked for feedback about staff and told us, 'They only stick with staff they know are good. If no good they don't get used again'.

Is the service well led?

The staff we spoke with were clear about their roles and responsibilities. They told us that they felt confident in being able to deliver the care and support needed.

The service had a quality assurance system and we saw that issues were highlighted and addressed.

People told us the management team were approachable and they were confident they would resolve any issues they might have.

We found that the service worked in partnership with other key organisations, including the local authority and safeguarding teams.

We found that the provider carried out quality assurance audits and implemented action plans to ensure people were supported within a safe service.

We saw that staff addressing people by their preferred names. Personal care was carried out in private and staff were discreet when asking about care needs. We saw that people felt comfortable in approaching staff and asking for assistance.

People told us that they were happy living at the home and that they felt that their care needs were being met. We found that people had planned care that met with their needs. We also found that people's consent had been obtained prior to treatment where appropriate.

We saw that staff had been trained appropriately and encouraged to develop within their roles. We also found that there were enough staff working at the home to support people with their care needs and community involvement.

Everyone told us that they were happy with the care and support they received. One person told us, "I am happy here, the staff are so nice. I think I am very lucky living here".

People also told us that staff treated them with respect and promoted their privacy. They told us that they felt safe from harm living at the home and that they would be listened to if they raised any concerns.

Our evidence gathered during this inspection supports the comments made by people who were receiving a service.

We looked at the care and welfare of people who used the service, and found that overall most people were happy with the service, although one person did raise concerns about the way some staff engaged with him. We also found that the provider had an effective care planning process in place.

We asked about safeguarding and how people were protected from abuse. We found that staff had all done safeguarding training and were able to identify abuse and report abuse.

We looked at staffing levels, and although the documentary evidence we saw showed that there were enough staff to cover each shift, concerns were raised by staff members we spoke to about whether there were enough staff to provide a good quality service.

Finally we asked about how the service was monitored and assessed for quality and found that there were effective processes in place to provide regular feedback from people and staff, and there were regular service reviews.